Kerri M Winters-Stone1,2, Karen S Lyons3,4, Jessica Dobek4, Nathan F Dieckmann4, Jill A Bennett3,4, Lillian Nail3,4, Tomasz M Beer3. 1. Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. wintersk@ohsu.edu. 2. School of Nursing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. wintersk@ohsu.edu. 3. Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. 4. School of Nursing, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, 97239, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer can negatively impact quality of life of the patient and his spouse caregiver, but interventions rarely target the health of both partners simultaneously. We tested the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a partnered strength training program on the physical and mental health of prostate cancer survivors (PCS) and spouse caregivers. METHODS:Sixty-four couples were randomly assigned to 6 months of partnered strength training (Exercising Together, N = 32) or usual care (UC, N = 32). Objective measures included body composition (lean, fat and trunk fat mass (kg), and % body fat) by DXA, upper and lower body muscle strength by 1-repetition maximum, and physical function by the physical performance battery (PPB). Self-reported measures included the physical and mental health summary scales and physical function and fatigue subscales of the SF-36 and physical activity with the CHAMPS questionnaire. RESULTS:Couple retention rates were 100 % for Exercising Together and 84 % for UC. Median attendance of couples to Exercising Together sessions was 75 %. Men in Exercising Together became stronger in the upper body (p < 0.01) and more physically active (p < 0.01) than UC. Women in Exercising Together increased muscle mass (p = 0.05) and improved upper (p < 0.01) and lower body (p < 0.01) strength and PPB scores (p = 0.01) more than UC. CONCLUSIONS: Exercising Together is a novel couples-based approach to exercise that was feasible and improved several health outcomes for both PCS and their spouses. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: A couples-based approach should be considered in cancer survivorship programs so that outcomes can mutually benefit both partners. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00954044.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Prostate cancer can negatively impact quality of life of the patient and his spouse caregiver, but interventions rarely target the health of both partners simultaneously. We tested the feasibility and preliminary efficacy of a partnered strength training program on the physical and mental health of prostate cancer survivors (PCS) and spouse caregivers. METHODS: Sixty-four couples were randomly assigned to 6 months of partnered strength training (Exercising Together, N = 32) or usual care (UC, N = 32). Objective measures included body composition (lean, fat and trunk fat mass (kg), and % body fat) by DXA, upper and lower body muscle strength by 1-repetition maximum, and physical function by the physical performance battery (PPB). Self-reported measures included the physical and mental health summary scales and physical function and fatigue subscales of the SF-36 and physical activity with the CHAMPS questionnaire. RESULTS: Couple retention rates were 100 % for Exercising Together and 84 % for UC. Median attendance of couples to Exercising Together sessions was 75 %. Men in Exercising Together became stronger in the upper body (p < 0.01) and more physically active (p < 0.01) than UC. Women in Exercising Together increased muscle mass (p = 0.05) and improved upper (p < 0.01) and lower body (p < 0.01) strength and PPB scores (p = 0.01) more than UC. CONCLUSIONS: Exercising Together is a novel couples-based approach to exercise that was feasible and improved several health outcomes for both PCS and their spouses. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: A couples-based approach should be considered in cancer survivorship programs so that outcomes can mutually benefit both partners. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00954044.
Authors: Eric S Zhou; Youngmee Kim; Mikal Rasheed; Catherine Benedict; Natalie E Bustillo; Mark Soloway; Bruce R Kava; Frank J Penedo Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2010-10-05 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Kerri M Winters-Stone; Jessica C Dobek; Jill A Bennett; Gianni F Maddalozzo; Christopher W Ryan; Tomasz M Beer Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: W M Hopman; T Towheed; T Anastassiades; A Tenenhouse; S Poliquin; C Berger; L Joseph; J P Brown; T M Murray; J D Adachi; D A Hanley; E Papadimitropoulos Journal: CMAJ Date: 2000-08-08 Impact factor: 8.262
Authors: Nalin A Singh; Theodora M Stavrinos; Yvonne Scarbek; Garry Galambos; Cas Liber; Maria A Fiatarone Singh Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Prue Cormie; Daniel A Galvão; Nigel Spry; David Joseph; Raphael Chee; Dennis R Taaffe; Suzanne K Chambers; Robert U Newton Journal: BJU Int Date: 2014-07-27 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Lee W Jones; Denise C Snyder; Richard J Sloane; Gretchen G Kimmick; Daniel C Hughes; Hoda J Badr; Paige E Miller; Lora E Burke; Isaac M Lipkus Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Karen M Mustian; Calvin L Cole; Po Ju Lin; Matt Asare; Chunkit Fung; Michelle C Janelsins; Charles S Kamen; Luke J Peppone; Allison Magnuson Journal: Semin Oncol Nurs Date: 2016-10-21 Impact factor: 2.315
Authors: Sharon L Manne; Deborah A Kashy; Talia Zaider; David Kissane; David Lee; Isaac Y Kim; Carolyn J Heckman; Frank J Penedo; Evangelynn Murphy; Shannon Myers Virtue Journal: Br J Health Psychol Date: 2019-03-10
Authors: Rebecca Gary; Sandra B Dunbar; Melinda Higgins; Brittany Butts; Elizabeth Corwin; Kenneth Hepburn; Javed Butler; Andrew H Miller Journal: J Appl Gerontol Date: 2018-01-18